Reactions and Separations

Optimize Aspect Ratio in

Industrial Fermenters
Gregory T. Benz, P.E. The ratio of a fermenter’s liquid height to diameter
Benz Technology
International, Inc. can impact its heat-transfer surface area, blend time,
and required agitator power. This article describes the
factors that go into determining the optimum
aspect ratio for a given set of conditions.

I
ndustrial fermenters are used to make all manner of prod-
ucts using live organisms as chemical reactors. Engineers
and designers are tasked with determining the optimum
aspect ratio of a fermenter in the design phase of a process.
Aspect ratio — also known as Z/T — is the ratio of liquid
height (Z) to the tank diameter (T).
This article discusses how to determine the optimum
aspect ratio of agitated gas-liquid fermenters. In these
fermenters, air is the gas most often added, but syngas,
methane, or other gases can be used, depending on the
application. Although some fermenters do not require agita-
tion (e.g., bubble column or airlift approaches), this article
focuses on mechanically agitated fermenters because they
are the most versatile. Agitated fermenters can achieve
higher mass-transfer rates and handle higher viscosities than
unagitated systems.
The optimum aspect ratio depends on every facet of the
design requirements, including the desired mass-transfer
rate, dissolved gas uniformity, cost of electric power, cost
of the agitator, cost of the vessel, cost of real estate, heat-
transfer requirements, the mass-transfer correlation used,
backpressure imposed on the tank, site restrictions, time
horizon of the plant economic calculations, etc.
This article describes the main impacts of the aspect ratio
on fermenter design and performance, and works through
an example application to show how to determine the ideal
aspect ratio.
Effect of changing Z/T
In general, as Z/T increases for a given volume, the
vessel becomes more expensive and the taller height may
increase installation cost. However, tall and thin vessels may
not need internals for heat transfer because they have larger
heat-transfer surface areas.
You can reduce Z/T (and thus reduce price in some
cases) by increasing the diameter of the tank. However, there
may be a step change at the transition diameter between
shop-fabricated and field-fabricated tanks. Transition diam-
eter will depend on the plant location and available logistics.
In general, most locations that require truck shipment will be
limited to a 14-ft-dia. (4.27-m) vessel.
Agitator shaft design becomes more difficult as aspect
ratio increases. The longer the shaft extension required,
the more difficult it is to keep the natural lateral frequency
of the shaft at least 25% higher than the operating speed.
Almost all fermenters require a steady bearing on the bottom
of the tank. Especially tall designs may also require hollow
shafts, and sometimes even an intermediate steady bearing.
Intermediate steady bearings are rarely used because they
are difficult to maintain.
As Z/T increases, required agitator power for mass
transfer decreases. This occurs because the absolute pressure
at the bottom of the tank becomes higher and increases the
mass-transfer driving force. And, as aspect ratio increases,
the superficial gas velocity tends to increase, which increases

26  www.aiche.org/cep  April 2019  CEP

Copyright © 2019 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE).
Not for distribution without prior written permission.
the overall mass-transfer coefficient at a given power input.
As mass-transfer driving force and coefficient are amplified,
agitator power input can be reduced.
Agitator capital cost may go up or down with increasing
Z/T. The reduced agitator power associated with higher Z/T
ratios will allow a smaller, less expensive motor, and the
required gearbox size and cost decreases as well. However,
more impellers and a longer shaft are needed as vessel
height increases, which raises the costs of wetted parts.
Required airflow decreases as aspect ratio increases,
but there is a minimum required airflow based on stoichi-
ometry. Also, for any given geometry, volume, oxygen-
transfer rate, backpressure, temperature, and mass-transfer
correlation, there is an optimum combination of agitator
power and airflow that yields the minimum total power.
Reference 1 provides a procedure for determining this. The
example in this article uses the optimum airflow for each
aspect ratio.
Although required airflow decreases with increasing
Z/T, the liquid head increases, which eventually increases
the compressor power required for a given air flowrate.
Therefore, compressor power may decrease initially with
increasing aspect ratio, but then at a certain point it will
begin to increase.
The dissolved oxygen gradient increases with increasing
p Figure 1. In each theoretical fermenter, the lower impeller is a deeply
concave radial turbine. Photo courtesy of Chemineer, a brand of NOV.
t Figure 2. In the
example fermenters
that have more
than one impeller,
the upper impellers
are up-pumping
high-solidity
axial turbines.
Photo courtesy of
Chemineer, a brand
of NOV.
Copyright © 2019 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE).
Not for distribution without prior written permission.
aspect ratio. This is due both to a larger pressure gradient
from top to bottom, resulting in higher gas solubility at the
bottom of the fermenter, and to a longer blend time associ-
ated with longer travel distances and more impellers.
Heat-transfer area also increases as Z/T increases. At
low aspect ratios, it may be impossible to get the required
heat transfer using just a jacket or just internal cooling tubes.
At very low aspect ratios, it can be difficult to achieve the
required heat transfer even with both a jacket and internal
cooling tubes and an external heat exchange loop may be
needed. Conversely, at very high aspect ratios, an external
exchanger may no longer be needed.
Optimizing aspect ratio example
The remaining sections explore various attributes of
fermenters designed with aspect ratios ranging from 0.5
to 5 (on an ungassed basis). In each case, the airflow and
power are optimized for the conditions chosen. All of the
fermenters considered have the following characteristics and
operating conditions:
• the working volume is 40,000 gal (151 m3) on an
ungassed basis (the gassed volume will be about 20% higher,
depending on airflow and aspect ratio)
• the oxygen transfer rate (OTR) is 150 mmol/L-hr
• the dissolved oxygen concentration (DO) is 1 mg/L at
the top of the tank (DO at the bottom will be higher, and will
be estimated based on the author’s experience)
• the saturation oxygen concentration at 21% oxygen and
1 atm pressure is set at 6.8 mg/L
• the fluid density is 1,020 kg/m3
• the fluid viscosity is 50 cP
• the barometric pressure is 1 bar
• a backpressure of 0.69 bar is applied to the head space
• assume that 95% of the oxygen consumed is returned to
the exhaust gas as CO2
• the agitator mechanical efficiency is set at 95%
• the compressor efficiency is set at 70%
• the total pressure drop in the air handling system (pip-
ing, filters, and sparge ring) is set at 1.72 bar.
In each fermenter, the lower impeller is a deeply concave
radial turbine (Figure 1). If more than one impeller is used,
the upper impellers are up-pumping high-solidity axial-flow
turbines (Figure 2).
The v’ant Riet ionic kLa correlation applies (1):
kLa = 0.25 (P/V)0.7 US0.2 (1)
where kLa is the overall mass-transfer coefficient (1/s),
P is the agitator power input under gassed conditions (W),
V is the liquid mass (kg), and US is the superficial gas veloc-
ity (m/s).
For the aspect ratios studied, vessel dimensions are
CEP  April 2019  www.aiche.org/cep  27
Reactions and Separations

shown in Table 1. In most cases, the largest vessel diameter Airflow and power
that can be shipped over the road is about 4.27 m. So, the Using the methods of Ref. 2, we chose the combina-
vessels in this example problem with an aspect ratio of less tion of airflow and agitator power that would achieve the
than 2.5 would need to be field-fabricated. required mass-transfer rate of 150 mmol/L-hr with the
Figures 3a and 3b are approximately to scale, and minimum total agitator and compressor brake power. (Brake
illustrate the height and footprint at the extreme ends of the power includes all mechanical and efficiency losses, so it is
aspect ratios studied. Liquid levels shown by the dotted lines what the motor must actually deliver.) We varied the airflow
are the ungassed liquid levels. The gassed levels will be in increments of 100 scfm (0.042 nm3/s) for the optimiza-
about 20% higher, so all impellers will be submerged under tion. Table 2 presents the results.
gassed conditions. As expected, the optimum airflow requirements decrease
somewhat with increasing aspect ratio, due to increasing
Table 1. As aspect ratio increases, the liquid level liquid head. The compressor brake power is at a minimum
increases and the diameter decreases. at a Z/T of 2.5. Then, as the aspect ratio increases further,
Nominal Tank Ungassed Tank Straight the compressor power increases as the head requires more
Ungassed Diameter, m Liquid Side, m power for a given airflow.
Aspect Ratio Level, m With increasing aspect ratio, the required agitator brake
0.5 7.62 3.81 4.42 power and the total brake power decrease. So, energy cost
1.0 5.94 5.85 7.16
favors higher aspect ratios. Because compressor brake power
is in a fairly narrow band, we will assume that the same
1.5 5.18 7.53 9.60
compressor can be used no matter which fermenter aspect
2.0 4.57 9.54 12.04 ratio is selected. Because the capital cost of the compressor
2.5 4.27 10.88 13.72 will not vary with aspect ratio, the compressor capital cost
3.0 3.96 12.56 15.85 will not be estimated for this example.
4.0 3.66 14.66 18.59
Heat-transfer data and assumptions
5.0 3.35 17.37 22.10
As aspect ratio increases, available heat-transfer area
increases, which affects design. Several assumptions apply:
(b) Aspect Ratio = 5.0 • the metabolic heat load is 69,000 J/L-hr, or a total of
1.04 × 1010 J/hr (9.9 × 106 Btu/hr)
• the process temperature is 37°C (98.6°F)
 Figure 3. (a) A fermenter with an • the cooling water inlet temperature is 15°C (59°F),
aspect ratio of 0.5 requires only one which requires chilled water.
impeller. (b) A fermenter with an aspect The fermenter is cooled via vertical tube bundles within
ratio of 5.0 has a much larger height and
smaller diameter, and requires several the vessel and a surrounding cooling jacket, except for the
more impellers. Source: Adapted from
Chemineer, a brand of NOV. Table 2. For each aspect ratio evaluated in the example,
an optimal airflow was determined that would achieve the
required mass-transfer rate and lowest total brake power.

Nominal Airflow, Agitator Compressor Total

Ungassed nm3/s Brake Brake Power, Brake
Aspect Power, kW Power,
Ratio kW kW
(a) Aspect Ratio = 0.5
0.5 1.21 303 316 619
1.0 1.13 263 309 572
1.5 1.09 240 308 548
2.0 1.04 220 308 528
2.5 1.00 214 303 518
3.0 1.00 201 312 512
4.0 0.96 192 310 502
5.0 0.92 183 309 493

28  www.aiche.org/cep  April 2019  CEP

Copyright © 2019 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE).
Not for distribution without prior written permission.
case of a 5:1 aspect ratio. The flowrate of cooling water The tube inside coefficient is based on:
to the jacket and vertical tube bundles is 7,570 L/min
(2,000 gpm) for each — i.e., 7,570 L/min for the jacket and NNu = 0.023(NRe)0.8(NPr)0.4 (6)
7,570 L/min for the entire set of tube bundles (Figure 4).
The process fluid has a density of 1,020 kg/m3, a vis- The Nusselt number equals the product of the film coef-
cosity of 50 cP, a thermal conductivity of 0.519 J/m-s-°C ficient (h) and a reference length dimension (e.g., tank diam-
(0.3 Btu/hr-ft-°F), and a heat capacity of 3,977 J/kg-°C eter for a jacket, tube diameter for tube bundles), divided
(0.95 Btu/lb-°F). by the thermal conductivity of the process fluid. After you
The usable height of jackets and tube bundles is the determine the Nusselt number, you can calculate the film
ungassed liquid level. The tube bundles consist of six groups coefficient and use it in the calculation of U, which can then
of three rows each. The tube bundles are made of 2.5-in. be used to calculate heat duty. The U value, combining resis-
Schedule 20 pipes, with a spacing of 2.5 in. The bundles tances, can be calculated by:
project inward from the tank wall no more than 20% of the
( )
–1
tank diameter (to allow for impeller clearance), which deter- ⎛ A
Ao ln Ao ⎞
Ao 1
mines the number of tubes per row. U= ⎜
⎜ Ah
+
2πkL
i
+ + fouling factors⎟
ho ⎟ (7 )
Due to the many possible jacket configurations, a reason- ⎜⎝ i i ⎟⎠
able jacket-side heat-transfer coefficient of 2,271 J/m2-s-°C
(400 Btu/h-ft2-°F) is used for all cases. In some cases, this where A is the tube area, subscripts o and i denote outer and
value might be a little low. inner, k is tube conductivity, and h is the convective heat-
Impeller sizes and shaft speeds are as listed in the capital transfer coefficient. Reasonable values for fouling factors
cost section. should be assumed.
The convective film coefficients are embedded in the Cooling duty includes agitator and compressor power
Nusselt numbers. The fouling resistance, tube conductivity input, as well as metabolic heat. No credit is taken for
resistance, and the inside and outside convective coefficients evaporation of liquid into exhaust gas.
are incorporated into an overall coefficient, U. The U value Article continues on next page
is used to compute cooling duty by the equation:
Raw
Material Inlet Vent
Q = UA∆T (2)

where Q is the cooling duty, A is the cooling area, and ∆T

is the log mean temperature difference between the vessel
contents and the cooling medium. Solving this requires an
iterative process, as the outlet cooling temperature of the Tube
Outlet
medium varies with the amount of heat removed.
The side-wall process-side coefficient is based on: Jacket
Inlet

NNu = 0.4(NRe)(2/3) (NPr)(1/3) (μ/μw)0.14(T/Z)0.15 (3)

Cooling
Cooling Tubes
where NNu is the Nusselt number, NRe is the Reynolds num- Jacket

ber, NPr is the Prandtl number, μ is the bulk viscosity, and

μw is the wall viscosity.
The bottom process-side coefficient is based on:

NNu = 0.5(NRe)(2/3) (NPr)(1/3) (μ/μw)0.14 (4)

Tube
Inlet
The tube outside coefficient is based on:

NNu = 0.09(NRe)0.65(NPr)0.3(2/nt)0.2(μ/μw)0.14 (5)

Broth Outlet Jacket Outlet

where nt is the number of tube bundles. An efficiency factor p Figure 4. Each fermenter is cooled by cooling water that flows through
of 0.846 was applied to account for there being three rows of cooling tubes within the reactor and a jacket that surrounds the reactor
tubes per bundle. (except for the fermenter with an aspect ratio of 5, which has no jacket).

Copyright © 2019 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE).

CEP  April 2019  www.aiche.org/cep  29
Not for distribution without prior written permission.
Reactions and Separations

Table 3. As aspect ratio increases, total heat-transfer area increases.

In turn, the total cooling increases and the cooling duty likewise decreases.

Nominal Jacket Number Tube Jacket Tube Total Cooling Ratio of Ratio of Ratio of
Ungassed Area, of Tubes Bundle Cooling, Bundle Cooling, Duty, Cooling to Jacket-Only Tube-Only
Aspect m2 Area, kW Cooling, kW kW Cooling Cooling to Cooling to
Ratio m2 kW Duty, Jacket Cooling Cooling
and Tubes Duty Duty

0.5 145 216 164 1,827 2,441 4,268 3,520 1.21 0.52 0.69
1.0 142 162 189 1,796 3,087 4,883 3,473 1.41 0.52 0.89
1.5 147 144 216 1,859 3,560 5,419 3,450 1.57 0.54 1.03
2.0 156 126 240 1,958 3,900 5,858 3,429 1.71 0.57 1.14
2.5 163 108 234 2,032 3,957 5,989 3,419 1.75 0.59 1.16
3.0 171 108 271 2,120 4,368 6,488 3,414 1.90 0.62 1.28
4.0 181 90 263 2,229 4,358 6,587 3,403 1.94 0.65 1.28
5.0 193 90 312 2,366 4,876 7,242 3,394 2.13 0.70 1.44

Heat-transfer results Blend time, DO uniformity

As expected, the total heat-transfer area increases
with aspect ratio (Table 3). So does the cooling capability.
Because heat-transfer correlations are approximately ±30%
accurate, it is recommended that the calculated cooling
capability be at least 30% higher than the cooling duty. The
cells shaded in blue do not meet that criterion. For an aspect
ratio of 0.5, even with the use of both a jacket and vertical
tube bundles, the heat transfer is insufficient and an external
heat exchange loop would likely be needed. For aspect
ratios from 1.0 to 4, the combination of jacket and tubes is
sufficient. For an aspect ratio of 5, the tubes alone are suf-
ficient; no jacket is needed.
The capital cost in the next section does not include a
jacket for an aspect ratio of 5, but includes both jacket and
tube bundles for the other aspect ratios. Note, however, that
aspect ratios of 3 and 4 almost meet the 30% safety factor
criterion when only tubes are used. Tweaking the design can
improve marginal heat transfer. Such tweaks include:
• use a higher cooling water flowrate
• use a colder chilled water temperature
• use smaller tubes with more tubes per row (this must be
balanced against the risk of vibration-induced fatigue failure
of the tubes)
• use more tube bundles (the power draw effects of
this change would need to be modeled; installations with
8–12 bundles have a markedly lower power draw than stan-
dard baffling)
• use four rows of tubes per bundle instead of three;
this would increase heat transfer from the tubes by about
15–20% at the same water flowrate.
For highly energetic fermentations (with an OTR greater
than 200 mmol/L-hr, for example), it may be necessary to
use an external heat exchange loop.
Blend time increases with aspect ratio. This, combined
with the steeper pressure gradient at higher Z/T values,
causes a larger DO variation from top to bottom of the
fermenter than vessels with smaller Z/T values. Past experi-
ence can be used as a guide to determine the DO gradient. It
is now possible to use computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
techniques to model DO gradient, although such models
have not been validated by field measurements (Figure 5).
The cost of such CFD models in 2018 was about $30,000 to
set up the model, and about $2,000–$3,000 per run.
Capital cost (agitator plus vessel only)
The agitator costs used in Table 4 were estimated based
on the author’s more than 40 years of experience in agitation.
The vessel costs are based on a combination of calculations,
vendor data, and private communications between the author
and users who have bought such vessels. As such, there may
be some error in these numbers. However, they illustrate the
fact that capital cost does not vary linearly with aspect ratio.
Interestingly, the total capital cost does not
seem to vary much between aspect ratios of
2 and 5. The majority of operating fermen-
ters have aspect ratios between 2 and 3. The
project engineer is encouraged to go through
the detailed calculations of capital and oper-
ating costs to find the optimum solution for
the particular case at hand.
t Figure 5. A model created with computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) can determine areas of the reactor that
have higher and lower concentrations of dissolved
oxygen (DO). In this image, red areas have high DO
while blue areas have low DO. Image courtesy of
Tridiagonal Solutions.

30  www.aiche.org/cep  April 2019  CEP

Copyright © 2019 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE).
Not for distribution without prior written permission.
 Table 4. Total agitator and vessel costs were determined based on calculations and author experience.
Ungassed Tank Diameter, Ungassed Tank Straight Agitator Cost Vessel Cost Total Cost
Aspect Ratio ft Liquid Level, ft Side, ft (Vessel + Agitator)
0.5 25 12.5 14.5 $580,000 $1,018,000 $1,598,000
1.0 19.5 19.2 23.5 $590,000 $728,000 $1,318,000
1.5 17 24.7 31.5 $600,000 $685,000 $1,285,000
2.0 15 31.3 39.5 $500,000 $703,000 $1,203,000
2.5 14 35.7 45 $510,000 $642,000 $1,152,000
3.0 13 41.2 52 $450,000 $729,000 $1,179,000
4.0 12 48.1 61 $470,000 $692,000 $1,162,000
5.0 11 57 72.5 $480,000 $672,000 $1,152,000

Other operating costs close to 5. Since we did not consider maintenance costs, the
Although total power requirements decrease with increas- higher cost of maintaining an intermediate steady bearing,
ing aspect ratio, some operating costs may increase. Clean- and the costs associated with a taller building and a higher
in-place (CIP) chemical, steam-in-place (SIP) steam, and personnel lift for maintenance, the optimum is more likely to
antifoam usage may all be greater in a tall vessel, because it be in the range of 3 to 4.
has more surface area to clean and sterilize and higher super- No single aspect ratio is optimum for all cases. This
ficial gas velocity, which may increase foaming. In addition, article identified many variables that change with aspect ratio
in some cases, two steady bearings may be required. We and the factors that go into determining the optimum for a
have assumed this would be the case for the 5:1 aspect ratio, given set of conditions. Engineers can use these principles to
and this steady bearing cost was added into the agitator cost ascertain the optimum for their particular application. CEP
in Table 4. Changing such a steady bearing would require
scaffolding and would probably take at least a day to service,
Nomenclature
compared to a few hours for a single bottom steady bearing.
A = area, m2
h = convective heat transfer coefficient
Closing thoughts k = tube conductivity
For the example problem, the total capital cost is kLa = overall mass-transfer coefficient, 1/s
relatively constant for aspect ratios of 1.5 to 5. Power cost nt = number of tube bundles
continues to decrease as aspect ratio increases. So, based on NNu = Nusselt number for heat transfer, dimensionless
the data and assumptions chosen, the optimum ratio may be NPr = Prandtl number for heat transfer, dimensionless
NRe = Impeller Reynolds number, dimensionless
P = power, W
Literature Cited Q = cooling duty, W
T = tank diameter, m
1. v’ant Riet, K., and J. Tramper, “Basic Bioreactor Design,”
U = overall coefficient to calculate cooling duty
Marcel Dekker, Chapter 11, Equation 11.4 (1991).
US = superficial gas velocity, m/s
2. Benz, G., “Optimize Power Consumption in Aerobic Fermen-
V = liquid volume, m3 or L
ters,” Chemical Engineering Progress, 99 (5), pp. 100–103
(May 2003). Z = liquid height, m
Greek Letters
ΔT = log mean temperature difference
GREGORY T. BENZ, P.E., is president of Benz Technology International, Inc. μ = bulk viscosity, kg/m-s
(2305 S Clarksville Rd., Clarksville, OH 45113; Phone: (937) 289-4504; μw = viscosity at wall, kg/m-s
Fax: (937) 289-3914; Email: g.benz@benz-tech.com; www.benz- Subscripts
­tech.com). He also partners with Terrace International (www.terrace­
inter­national.com) and has over 40 years of experience in the design
i = inner
of agitation systems, specializing in fermentation, bioreactors, and o = outer
continuous-flow reactors. He received a BS in chemical engineering
from the Univ. of Cincinnati in 1976, and has taken a course on fermen-
tation biotechnology at the Center for Professional Advancement. He
is a member of AIChE, the International Society for Pharmaceutical Acknowledgments
Engineering (ISPE), the Society for Industrial Microbiology and Bio­
technology, and the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai. He
Figures 1 through 3 are provided courtesy of Chemineer, a brand of
is a subject matter expert (SME) with ISPE. Benz is a registered profes- NOV. Figure 5 is provided by Tridiagonal Solutions. Some vessel cost
sional engineer in Ohio and a member of American Mensa. data were provided by Apache Stainless.

Copyright © 2019 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE).

CEP  April 2019  www.aiche.org/cep  31
Not for distribution without prior written permission.